Which cases are most cited on Section 139(9)?

CIT v. Merchant (280 CTR 381) — 68 citing judgments; Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. vs. DCIT 313 ITR 263; Ramond Limited v. DCIT (315 ITR 72) — 47 citing judgments; DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc. (9 SOT 100) — 35 citing judgments; ITO v. Seth Bros. (SC) (74 ITR 836) — 24 citing judgments; Invensys Systems Inc. v. DI.T (AAR) (317 ITR 438) — 23 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 139(9)?

BharatTax indexes 89 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. Merchant (280 CTR 381) is the decision most relied on for Section 139(9), cited in 68 judgments. Under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, the assessee bears the onus to prove the creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction to explain any cash credit. Failure to provide a satisfactory explanation allows the amount to be added to the assessee's income.

The decision most relied on for Section 139(9) is CIT v. Merchant (280 CTR 381), cited in 68 of the 89 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 139(9)

CIT v. Merchant

280 CTR 381 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, the assessee bears the onus to prove the creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction to explain any cash credit. Failure to provide a satisfactory explanation allows the amount to be added to the assessee's income.

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. vs. DCIT 313 ITR 263; Ramond Limited v. DCIT

315 ITR 72 · 2009 · High Court

citing judgments

For a payment to qualify as consideration for the 'use' or 'right to use' property or information, the payer must have control and possession over that right, property, or information. This interpretation is crucial for determining the applicability of Explanations 5 and 6 to Section 9(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act.

DCIT v. PanAmSat International Systems Inc.

9 SOT 100 · 2006 · ITAT

citing judgments

Interconnect usage charges and roaming charges incurred for the use of standard facilities are not in the nature of Fees for Technical Services (FTS) if there is no human intervention in providing the services.

ITO v. Seth Bros. (SC)

74 ITR 836 · 1969 · Reported

citing judgments

Invensys Systems Inc. v. DI.T (AAR)

317 ITR 438 · 2009 · Reported

citing judgments

CLSA Ltd. v. ITO(IT)

305 ITR 208 · 2008 · Reported

citing judgments

DDIT (Exemptions) v. Petroleum Sports Promotion Board

362 ITR 235 · 2014 · High Court

citing judgments

Calcutta Management Association v. ITO

42 ITD 62 · 1992 · ITAT

citing judgments

S. Kumar Enterprises (Synfabs) Ltd. v. JCIT

170 TTJ 37 · 2015 · ITAT

citing judgments

CIT v. Mahalaxmi Rice Factory

163 Taxmann 565 · 2007 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 139(9)

ELECTRONFAB ENGINEERING PVT LTD,SEEPZ SEZ MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 4828/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, Advocate (virtually appear) & Mrs. Usha DalalFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)

Section 115BSection 115JSection 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 250

NAVIN VINODKUMAR AGARWAL,THANE vs. DCIT 14(1)(2), AAYAKAR ABHAVAN MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ITA 8445/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Respondent: Mr. Mahesh Saboo

Section 154

FERRANZA ELECTRIC VEHICLE PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5454/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rahul Agarwal, Adv &For Respondent: Ms.Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

SANKALP SOCIETY,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), GHAZIABAD

ITA 332/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 331/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Ita No. 332/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Sankalp Society, Vs Income Tax Officer(E), 1, Rulapi Vihar, Saharanpur, Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-247001 Ghaziabad-201002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaats3377A Assessee By: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.02.2026 Order These Assessee’S Twin Appeals For Assessment Years 2014- 15 & 2018-19 Arise Against The Addl./Jcit(A)-1, Ahmedabad’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025- 26/1084344501(1) & 1084344609(1) Dated 02.01.2026, In Proceedings U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

SANKALP SOCIETY,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), GHAZIABAD

ITA 331/DEL/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Pratiyush Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND TRUST,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 53(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2992/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 10Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

SHREE TARAK GURU JAIN GRANTHALYA,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU / ITO (EXEMPTION), UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

ITA 22/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 1Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ba)Section 13(9)Section 139(5)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)(A)

SHREE TARAK GURU JAIN GRANTHALYA,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU / ITO (EXEMPTION), UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

ITA 21/JODH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 1Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ba)Section 13(9)Section 139(5)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)(A)

MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,KANPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 653/LKW/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 44A

DEVANG YOGESH METHA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD-19(1)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 5211/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by

Section 139Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 140BSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2Section 250Section 44A

BHADRAVATHI RAMALINGASETTY MANJUNATH SETTY,BHADRAVATHI vs. ITO WARD-1 TPS , SHIMOGA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1459/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Sri Sachin S Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N., D.R

Section 139Section 139(4)Section 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271BSection 44A

VAITIANADIN,PUDUCHERRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, PUDUCHERRY, PUDUCHERRY

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2466/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2466/Chny/2025 िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri V.Meenakshi Sundar, C.A GHFor Respondent: Shri M.Subashri, Addl. CIT(virtual)

Section 115BSection 139(9)Section 143(1)

TAKENAKA INDIA PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. JCIT,CIRCLE-25(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2848/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 438Section 43B

GOSWAMI BHAGWAN LAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD EXEMPTION, FARIDABAD

ITA 2238/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10Section 10(230)Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

KRANTHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,BHADRACHALLAM vs. DCIT., EXEMPTION CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our observations given hereinabove

ITA 820/HYD/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

Section 11Section 11oSection 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

ITA 20/GTY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

ITA 19/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

ITA 18/GTY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

FAURECIA EMISSIONS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ASSISTANT / DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1) CHE, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1223/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1223/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2023-24 Faurecia Emissions Control Assistant Commissioner Of Technologies India Pvt Ltd, Income Tax, 1St Floor, No.634, Karumuthu Center, Corporate Circle-1(1), Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai. Chennai-600 035 [Pan: Aaaca8450F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.Siddhesh Chaugula, C.A. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.11.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Mr.Siddhesh Chaugula, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 139Section 139(9)Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

MADHYAM,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- EXEMP 1(4), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1456/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154

Showing 1–20 of 89 · Page 1 of 5